Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 359 posts

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#251

Post by paulddraper »

voakbasda wrote: post #126
paulddraper wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fortunately, some people see no reason to hamstring development. > Meanwhile America is tying itself in knots: politicians and bureaucrats are banning new data centers, piling on state regulations, and pushing for new federal agencies to pre-approve frontier models. > This is how you lose the AI race. The rest of the world won’t play by our rules if we bog ourselves down. Permissionless innovation is how America won…

If only reason would prevail in the Whitehouse….

David Sacks is a Trump admin advisor.

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#252

Post by solenoid0937 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #224
solenoid0937 wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Distills are bad for the US economy because they compress margins that otherwise go to pushing the frontier. You'd see model progress dramatically slowed if US companies had to compete on distills.

> You'd see model progress dramatically slowed if US companies had to compete on distills We’re already competing on distills—they exist. The question is whether America will actually compete or if it will lean into its populist tendency and cede the market globally to China.

If you want the cost of today's intelligence to go down, distills are fantastic.

If you want AGI to arrive sooner, distills force you to move your compute off the frontier and will necessarily delay it significantly.

It's a question of what you actually want out of the AI race.

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#253

Post by brazukadev »

solenoid0937 wrote: post #187
wolttam wrote: post #5

No way this can go wrong for the U.S. economy! Do everything you can to protect the existing incumbents, pay no mind to the wider consequences. Winning strategy.

Distills are bad for the US economy because they compress margins that otherwise go to pushing the frontier. You'd see model progress dramatically slowed if US companies had to compete on distills.

bad for the US economy but good for the World economy.

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#254

Post by adrian_b »

bloppe wrote: post #179
palmotea wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you don’t address the ridiculous “copyright forever, nothing goes public domain” policies that got us to this place 1. You're mischaracterizing and exaggerating the policies to falsely support your point. Things go into the public domain all the time: https://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/publicdomainday/2026/ . 2. It's not like the model companies had the attitude "oh copyright is too long, we disagree on the term." Their…

They're attitude is more "this is fair use" which, according to all precedent, is probably true in most cases (unless the models actually start regurgitating huge parts of the Copyrighted material without a license). Of course, distillation is also fair use under Copyright law. Copyright was never meant to be a moral framework. It was always a practical framework designed to incentivize publishing that would ultimate…

"This is fair use" is just their public defense, but obviously they have never given a thought about this when hoarding data, as shown by the modest 1.5B fine of Anthropic, which they can now write off as a normal business cost.

I am completely willing to accept that "this is fair use" for any company that publishes the LLM weights, i.e. the result of processing all the copyrighted work, because they have performed a public service with this.

But when the so-called "fair use" was a method to transform public data into private data that they guard and claim that any access to it would now be IP theft and which they use to obtain huge profits, that does not look like fair use to me.

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#256

Post by john_strinlai »

revolvingthrow wrote: post #129
usef- wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What should they do instead? As far as I can tell from their actions they (Anth) are true believers about safety

So far the first and only sophisticated cyberattack was carried out by openai rather than by one the subversive commie models that hate us for our freedoms, so forgive me for taking their safety and alignment spiel somewhat less seriously than they’d like.

>So far the first and only sophisticated cyberattack

the only one that was publicly admitted to and which you happened to have read about.

even prior to ai, most companies and organizations would never admit to being breached unless irrefutable proof of the breach came to light. in other cases it is just immediately classified and the public finds out 20 years later (or, depending on the country, simply covered up).

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#257

Post by arionhardison »

echelon wrote: post #245
arionhardison wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fully agree; but we also MUST STOP PRETENDING like HN and YC are good faith actors here. They are not. They blatantly curate (by flagging) comments and do everything possible to help both companies do this. Its not just OpenAI/Anthropic, there is a toxic ecosystem here supporting itself and doing everything possible to subvert the will of the people. There is 0 interest in merit and absolute focus on regulatory cap…

It's not HN. It's the readers. There are lots of Anthropic and OpenAI employees here. There are also lots of people that totally hate AI here. If they don't like your comment, some of them will flag you. I get caught up in this frequently. The flagging strongly correlates with the audience that the headline sentiment attracts. In a thread like this that is laser-focused on real criticism of OpenAI and Anthropic you'l…

TY for your response. People like you make me miss the old HN. I (antidotally) feel that now its much more common to just down vote and feel self-righteous as opposed to actually taking the time to craft an articulate response. The reason I feel its more than the readers is because "dang" and the other hall monitors do their best to enforce this also. Its no longer the "hacker mentality" its post what helps the YC portfolio and no matter the merit we are OK with it. Honestly its not so hard to see why they fell in so hard with Trump given their true nature e.g: Zuck being the #1 funder of things that will essentially kill the open internet. I'm starting to think it was all fake, just a bunch of Trump-esq BS even before Trump.

This comment will be flagged soon and disappear just like anything else that does not support their "Trumpish" view of what the world should be.

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#258

Post by JumpCrisscross »

solenoid0937 wrote: post #252
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You'd see model progress dramatically slowed if US companies had to compete on distills We’re already competing on distills—they exist. The question is whether America will actually compete or if it will lean into its populist tendency and cede the market globally to China.

If you want the cost of today's intelligence to go down, distills are fantastic. If you want AGI to arrive sooner, distills force you to move your compute off the frontier and will necessarily delay it significantly. It's a question of what you actually want out of the AI race.

> If you want AGI to arrive sooner

Yeah, I don’t buy this is happening. I’m open to being wrong. But folks who believe that can put their money where their mouths are in terms for stumping up cash for the training.

> distills force you to move your compute off the frontier

Versus moving it to inference?

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#259

Post by WarmWash »

aeve890 wrote: post #177
WarmWash wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More like the top ~35%, but it's taboo to talk about that.

What do you mean ~35% ?

I mean if you cut out the bottom 65% and the top 1% (but perhaps even top 5%) of americans, you are left with a group of generally affluent people who are the actual backbone of the US economy. These people work white collar career jobs, own houses, own stocks, have retirement on track, college debt paid off or soon to be, good health insurance, go on vacations, drive new(ish) cars, let their instagram impulse buying get a bit out of control sometimes, maybe they work from home or are hybrid, and they mostly all go out and vote.

These people are the antithesis of "America is a Shithole", and they know it, so they keep their head down and point at the top 1% like everyone else. It's virtuous and pure to do so (and of course keeps the heat off them, the wealthiest contingent). If you isolate this group and compare them globally, it spells out why for decades so many white collar workers wanted to be in the US rather than Europe or the East.

Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line

#260

Post by brazukadev »

lacy_tinpot wrote: post #50
rkozik1989 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are we winning? Nobody has actually created a business model that works yet. Just because you can hemorrhage hundreds of billions of dollars to build the most performant model doesn't necessarily mean you're going to make your money back.

Have you actually looked at the current financials?

have you not?
Post reply on HN